Mike Lee – Waitemata and Gulf Ward Councillor

There was a very large turn-out of mourners for the funeral of Professor John Morton at Saint Mary’s Anglican Church in Parnell last Friday. The size of the crowd reflected the stature of the man and the enormously high regard in which he was held  – he was a truly great New Zealander.

An erudite scholar, a charismatic lecturer and New Zealand’s outstanding marine biologist of his time John Morton was also interested in a much wider field of natural history and philosophy.  He wrote extensively on these subjects. He was in other words a true naturalist perhaps the last in a long line of great New Zealand natural scientists and great natural scientists of New Zealand – people like Charles Fleming, Robert Falla, Leonard Cockayne, Hotchstetter -  stretching all the way back to Dumont d’Urville and Joseph Banks.

When John Morton returned from ten years in London in the early 1960s to become head of the School of Zoology and Biological Sciences at Auckland University he was one of New Zealand’s most talented up and coming academics.   

Motivated by a great love, indeed a reverence for the natural world and appalled by the ever-growing assault on the natural environment John Morton soon became a conservation activist.

 In 1974 in addition to lecturing biology students, organising his famous marine biology field trips and managing a department of feisty academics at Auckland University he was asked to stand for a seat on the Auckland Regional Authority. As a member of the ARA Prof Morton worked tirelessly to strengthen  regional land planning and open space protection policies. Enlightened polices which the ARA became famous for – and which were inherited and carried on by its successor the Auckland Regional Council.

On the wider national stage Prof Morton led the conservation movement to a series of victories in large scale set-piece battles in the 1970’s and 80s which saved the last of New Zealand’s mainland native forests, Pureora, Whirinaki, Waitututu and South Westland from logging.

 I first met John Morton in 1984.  By then he was already a famous figure, widely known from his popular natural history TV programmes and for his role as a leading conservationist. Prof was a gifted TV presenter, and drawing from his years of experience as a university lecturer he was well aware of the value of applying techniques of ‘showmanship’ to help deliver his message. But perhaps it was  the voice – the somewhat nasal but sonorous voice, conveying warmth, knowledge and sincerity that was his most distinctive attribute as a TV performer and public speaker.

Still in my early 30s I was the local chairman of the Forest and Bird Protection Society Waiheke section which was something of a part-time role for me in those days as I was still at sea.  Waiheke Forest & Bird had led a fund-raising campaign, mainly driven by the late Joy St Paul, to purchase a block of land from the Anglican church.  The land  – which we called the ‘Church Block or as it is now officially known as ‘Te Hāhi Reserve’ – was adjacent to the Forest and Bird Goodwins Reserve at Te Matuku Bay. 

 As a distinguished life member of Forest and Bird Prof Morton came to Waiheke with other Church and Forest and Bird people to attend the opening ceremony. It was a privilege to meet him.

Long before it arrived ‘1984’ always had ominous connotations because of the George Orwell book – but 1984 actually turned out to be a portentous year for New Zealand.  The ‘Year Zero’ of an economic and political revolution that would change New Zealand for ever – and I have to say not for the good.

 Though none of us would have dreamed about it during that sunny morning in March, a new Labour government was soon to come to power and very much under the influence of private finance interests and neo-liberal bureaucrats in the Treasury and Reserve Bank, unleash a New Right revolution in New Zealand.

John Morton’s left wing politics were not emphasised in the obituaries but they were important to understanding the man.  In the 70s Prof was a Labour supporter and no doubt like most Labour voters  – and I dare say most New Zealanders  – he would have welcomed the fresh new labour government which took office in July that year.

But soon it became all too clear that the radical new policies, so-called ‘Rogernomics’, being unleashed in Blitzkrieg fashion were not traditional Labour policies at all and certainly not the policies most New Zealanders thought they were getting when they voted Labour.

Prof Morton abhorred the money-driven free market and monetarist policies.  He was personally affronted by them I suppose for a number of reasons – philosophical (I recall him saying once that “economics should be seen as a sub-set of ecology”), and I guess even theological.  Neo-liberalism offended him intellectually and emotionally and he despised what ’rogernomics’ was doing to the country. 

In 1989 with state assets like Telecom being sold off – and the welfare state being dismantled it was the final straw, John Morton laid aside his books and his microscope and came down from the ivory tower once again to join the fightback.  Prof became a founding member of the NewLabour Party which soon became the core of the Alliance.  In September 1990 I recall the Prof speaking with Jim Anderton, Phil Amos and Cr Sandra Lee at a NewLabour election meeting in a crowded Surfdale Hall on Waiheke in support of a local parliamentary candidate Cliff Robinson.

In December 1991 when ARC member for Auckland Central Hiwi Tauroa suddenly resigned I was selected as a candidate for the ensuing by-election by the newly formed Alliance.  In my election brochure, I was supported by people like Bruce Jesson, Bruce Hucker, Phil Amos – and Prof. John Morton. 

Late in 1991 I recall calling at Prof’s Castor Bay house to collect his carefully type-written testimonial.

The Prof wrote.  “I am glad Mike Lee is standing for the Auckland Central seat on the ARC for two reasons: Auckland needs better regional government, and Mike Lee will have much to offer a ‘new look: ARC’.  He knows local issues and has years of local experience, that will fit into the wider regional picture.  Regional Councils have many responsibilities for environmental care.  Yours is the Hauraki Gulf, with its splendid heritage of sailing water and islands. The City and the region haven’t in the past protected the Gulf enough.  Today it is at the mercy of the port company, to implement the wrong, short-sighted approval given them to dump dredgings in the Gulf waters.  Mike, by his track record and years of local battling, has earned your confidence and your vote for the ARC.”

I of course was still completing a biological sciences degree (as an adult student after my time at sea) at the Auckland University School of Biological Sciences where Prof was Emeritus Professor and still occasionally appeared.  I was privileged to see a lot more of him during my first years on the ARC – especially when I was chairman of Regional Parks.

I recall speaking alongside Prof Morton, Governor-General Cath Tizard, and the late chairman of the ARC Phil Warren at the launch of the wonderful ARC published book Natural History of Auckland which John, supported by other leading Auckland natural scientists and the artist Ron Cometti helped write and edit.  Prof and I served also served together on the committee of Project Crimson.  Any meeting in which Prof featured could always been guaranteed to be lively – and stimulating – with always a few laughs.

I recall one Project Crimson meeting in which an artist’s depiction of a possum was shown to the committee – this to be published in NZ Geographic.  The painting was essentially well-meaning propaganda, emphasising the villainous predatory nature of possums – the snarling animal’s face almost reptilian.   I was critical of this approach and said so and then waxing lyrical, went on to point out that the brushtail possum was a native animal of the Tasmanian rainforest, perfectly adapted to its environment and it wasn’t its fault that it was brought to New Zealand.  Furthermore while we need to remove it from our environment we should always respect the animal for its intrinsic worth etc etc.  To which Prof Morton responded “the only good possum is a dead possum”.  That quickly settled matters.  I beat a hasty retreat and to general laughter said “Having said that -I’ll be following the Prof on this one.”

In 1995 at my request Prof readily agreed to join me on the ‘Save Our Islands Trust’, along with some other distinguished Aucklanders like Phil Amos, Ted Lees and Gordon Hodson, in a campaign to secure Kaikoura Island in public ownership (a campaign which was eventually successful).  I recall Prof making a typical eloquent pitches to the Auckland City Council and to the ARC for support to buy Kaikoura.

Always a drawcard for any meeting and always willing to help out what he considered a good cause, I remember he turned out in 1996 again to oblige me to speak at an election meeting in Whangaparaoa where I stood for the Alliance as a candidate for Rodney. 

 In more recent years sadly as his health became more fragile,  he gradually withdrew from public life.  In 2005 I recall driving out to see him in his home at Torbay to discuss his ideas on protection of privately-owned open space.

In 2008 by then quite frail, he granted me a great favour by coming out in public for one last time along with with his wife Pat – to attend a reunion celebration of the 15^th anniversary of the publication of the Natural History of Auckland at the ARC Botanic Gardens.  Here I think surrounded by an admiring audience of scientists, regional councillors, parks rangers and members of the public he made his last speech.

 Prof Morton was a great leader, a great teacher, a great writer. He was the author of natural history classics like ‘The NZ Seashore’ (the famous ‘Morton & Miller) and ‘the Pacific Seashore’.  His writing He also wrote newspaper columns on a wide range of subjects.  His writing enriched by his vast knowledge of history, literature, philosophy and theology.  I need to mention that Prof was also religious man with a deep faith in Christianity. 

 His interest in theology was probably the least known aspect of his life (at least to me).  But in the eulogies at his funeral Prof Morton’s interest in theology was recalled.  In his eulogy Bishop John Paterson told mourners that Prof Morton’s knowledge of theology was highly respected in the Anglican Church and by all accounts Prof could hold his own in debate with Bishops and leading church theologians.  In the 1970s on top of all his other activities Prof Morton somehow became deeply involved in a world-wide debate within the Anglican Church about an early Church controversy, the Filioque.

The word Filioque which is Latin for ‘and the Son’ – related to the Nicene Creed and the procession of the Holy Ghost from God the Father. In the 6^th century the word Filioque had been added to the Latin version of Nicene Creed by the Western Church – much to the horror of the Eastern Church based in Constantinople which adhered to the original Greek version. In 1059 this argument led to a formal schism between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy – a schism which has lasted to this day. In the late 1960s (perhaps somewhat belatedly) theologians in the Anglican Church in England recommended the Filioque word be removed from the Anglican recital of the Nicene Creed.  For reasons (which must have been interesting) but ones he clearly felt very strongly about, the Prof argued eloquently – and successfully against the move.

At the funeral I was intrigued to hear about this side of the Prof. I recall in October 2008 after the Natural History of Auckland reunion we rode back together in a taxi which we had arranged to take Prof and Pat home.  We chatted away happily until I was dropped off at the ARC, talking mainly about politics and the old days of the ARA. It was to be our last conversation.  I wish I had known then about the Filioque then though – that would have made for an intriguing conversation. 

 Prof Morton leaves his wife Pat (very much the strong woman behind the great man) and his children Clare and Rob. Both Rob and Clare spoke at the funeral.  Rob who is a personal friend and long time Waiheke resident spoke superbly of his life with his father .  But as I left the church on that sunny autumn afternoon to join with other mourners to lay a kowhai twig on Prof’s plain pine box coffin and to murmur a last “goodbye Prof”– I felt the ones left behind were the ones to be pitied.  We have lost our great leader – a leader who generously shared with us his courage and his vision.  We were better people for knowing Prof Morton and the world a better place because of him.  As I wrote in his memorial book “Tribute to a great New Zealander – we are all diminished with the passing of Professor John Morton”

I wish to welcome everyone here this morning to this handsome new Baldwin Avenue Station

Congratulations especially to Auckland Transport and KiwiRail and thanks also to the workers who built it.

In the preparations leading up to  this event the Auckland Transport Communications team led by Wally Thomas made some inquiries about the origins of the name Baldwin Avenue.  We all assumed ‘Baldwin’ was the name of some local dignitary or business notable.  However in their internet search Wally and his team discovered that Baldwin Avenue was named after a very famous British Prime Minister of the 1920s and 1930s – Stanley Baldwin.  Now I was at the movies on Friday evening watching ‘The Kings Speech’ and the first Prime Minister to advise the newly crowned King George Vl was Stanley Baldwin – and Baldwin of course was very much instrumental in the elevation of the King George Vl and the abdication of his brother.  So history is always with us.

Ladies and Gentlemen last 2010 was a year of tremendous achievement in terms of building and opening rail stations in Auckland – as you will recall we opened Newmarket, Grafton, Avondale, Onehunga and New Lynn. 

This year Auckland Transport intends to maintain the momentum.  The next station after this I understand will be Mt Albert which will be much more elaborate – somewhat along the lines of a New Lynn.  And then of course there will be a new station at Manukau – something which I am sure will be near and dear to the heart of Mayor Len Brown who sends his warm greetings and congratulations. 

Near and dear to my own heart will be progress on a new station at Parnell – a heritage/museum station which has long be supported by myself and the local community.  A station which will be built around the former Newmarket heritage station building.  I am pleased to say that the long standing impasse between KiwiRail and Mainline Steam, (the leasees of the big shed on the site which has all the wonderful old steam locomotives in it) is being resolved and hopefully that should clear the way for us to make progress there.

This January Mayor Len Brown announced his objective of doubling public transport patronage within 10 years – we in Auckland Council and Auckland Transport are happy to sign up to the Mayor’s objective.  Public transport patronage in Auckland in recent years has increased dramatically – rail in particular – from 2.5 to 3 million passenger trips per year some 5 years ago to over 9 million passenger trips per year today.  I believe that given that impressive momentum within 2 years Auckland’s rail patronage figures will overtake Wellington’s which are  currently just over 11 million passengers per year – this with electrification now slowly by steadily being installed across the network by KiwiRail and a new fleet of EMUs which will be arriving around that time- will make Auckland the premier rail city in New Zealand. 

So I want to thank everyone in involved in this, the government, KiwiRail and Auckland Transport.  The preceding speaker Chairman of Auckland Transport Mark Ford in reading out the letter from Transport Minister Hon Steven Joyce noted the importance the Minister placed on attending Auckland station openings – and I certainly can attest to that. Steven Joyce since he became Minister has been punctilious about attending just about every Auckland station opening we’ve had over the last two years.  Given that – and on your behalf I would like to invite the Minister to further station openings – on the CBD Link. 

I would like to invite the Minister to open the future Aotea Station, Karangahape Station, Symonds Street Station – and then after that I would ask him to open a Mangere rail station and finally a station at Auckland International Airport.

Once again congratulations and thanks to everyone who built this excellent new Baldwin Avenue station.

Tena koutou katoa.

First of all I wish to extend to you the warm greetings of the Mayor of Auckland Len Brown who cannot be with us at this particular event as he has other engagements on this important day – in fact I believe right now he is out on the harbour on the HMNZS Wellington.  .  May I also extend to you all the greetings of the new Auckland Council.

Can I also acknowledge the dignitaries present her today, the members of the clergy,  Rev Wayne Toleafoa principal chaplain RNZN, Rev Chris Barnes, Anglican Chaplain of the Mission to Seafarers, Ngati Whatua  kaumatua Matt Maihi,  fishing industry leaders here in Auckland Shane Walsh Sanford manager of inshore fisheries.  Shane is also the driving force behind the Auckland seafood festival.  Congratulations Shane the festival this year has been more successful than ever.  Also inshore fleet manager of Sanford Jim Fitzpatrick.  And representing the captains and crews of the fishing fleet Caption Bob McCallister and his lovely wife Gracie.  Jim is the president of the the NZ Fishing Industry Guild.  May I also greet the captains and crews of the fishing fleet here today. Ladies and Gentlemen – citizens of Auckland.

It is right and fitting that today and by tradition we Aucklanders focus the celebrations of anniversary of the founding of this great city on our magnificent Waitemata Harbour.

For it was the Waitemata  Harbour – with all its manifest advantages that persuaded Governor William Hobson, the first Governor of New Zealand to carry his flag here and establish the capital of the new colony of New Zealand.  We remember he did so at the invitation of the great Ngati Whatua ancestor Apihai te Kawau And it was Governor Hobson who first called this place Auckland.Historian and commentator Gordon McLauchlan makes the argument that it is William Hobson who should be considered the true ‘father of Auckland’, and as I stand here on Hobson Wharf can I congratulate that citizen who last week wrote to the NZ Herald proposing that the time was long overdue that we in Auckland put up a statue to Governor Captain William Hobson.

Irish Born - Governor William Hobson - First Governor of New Zealand and founding father of Auckland.

Governor Hobson, is very much one of us -  unlike all the other colonial governors he never made it home to England – he lies with us still – in a rather humble (and rather neglected) grave in Grafton. 

Governor Hobson, Captain Hobson was of course a Royal Navy man and when you think about it, a navy captain is a very fitting person to have founded a city which has such a proud maritime history.

New Zealand is very much an island nation and Auckland is very much a Harbour City –  and not just a harbour city but a Port City the location of the largest port in the country – the Ports of Auckland,  100% owned by the people of Auckland.

The wisdom of Governor Hobson’s decision to build a city here has been borne out – and though we grown away somewhat from our maritime roots, for it is still largely by the maritime trade that Auckland makes its way in the world.

And we can see out on the Harbour today – all the varied elements which make up our proud maritime tradition –

• the seafaring tradition of the Maori people is symbolised by the Ngati Whatua waka taua, Mahuhu o te Rangi
• the Royal New Zealand Navy represented by the frigate HMNZS Wellington and fisheries patrol vessel HMNZS Rotoiti
• the working black boats, the tugs and merchant ships –
• the vast yachting and recreational power boat fleet which has made NZ one of, if not the leading yachting nation in the world

and last but not least the ships of our proud, hardworking and economically vital fishing fleet.

If one studies the history of the great maritime nations of the Old World, Portugual, Spain, Holland, Britain, France and Norway you will find that it was the fishing fleets of those countries which for a number of technical and economic reasons formed the foundation – the very backbone of those great maritime nations.  And that is true today, with the new economically powerful countries of Asia.

New Zealand for its part is a relatively small country – with a relatively small population.  But we in NZ don’t always appreciate that New Zealand’s coastline being 15,134 km is the 9^th largest in the world, and New Zealand’s marine fishing territory – our Exclusive Economic Zone is 4.4 million square kilometres – the 4^th largest EEZ in the world.

So small we may be – but in terms of ocean territory, New Zealand is a veritable Super Power.  So the importance of our fishing industry and our fishing fleet should never be underestimated.

Our fishing fleet not only feeds New Zealand but also helps feed the world. New Zealand’s total annual fish and seafood exports amount to 287,000 tonnes a year  – worth some $1.4 billion dollars annually – and rising.

The fishing industry also provides employment for nearly 27,000 New Zealanders. 

The new Auckland Council and its Waterfront Development Agency following on from the former Auckland Regional Council is very much aware of the critical importance of the our fishing industry to New Zealand – and to Auckland for food, for jobs and for exports and we pledge to work closely and supportively with the Fishing Industry.   While our waterfront has enormous potential as an attraction and entertainment precinct for both Aucklanders and our visitors alike – we are also determined that this will remain a working waterfront. And I believe Aucklanders understand and support this.

So let us acknowledge today the hardworking men and women of our fishing industry and can I on behalf of the laypeople here today endorse the prayers of our chaplains and the blessing of Rev Chris Barnes and say ‘God Bless the ships of the fishing fleet and all who sail in them.’

Na reira, tena koutou, tena kutou, tena koutou, katoa.

First of all I extend readers the Compliments of the Season and hope everyone is having a happy Christmas holiday.

As one gets older – the more the time seems to go faster.  When one was a kid, years were epic events, now they seem so fly by.   But this last year was different.  It was always pretty clear that 2010 was going to be an unusual year.  The Super City reform was the biggest change facing Auckland local government since the abolition of the provinces in the 19^th century  – and then there was a small matter of the council elections.  But one thing I didn’t expect was the year to turn out to be so long!

I started my web site in July – most of the major events associated with the last months of the ARC, the election campaign, the formal dissolution of the ARC and the establishment of the Auckland Council have been well covered in my various posts.

However the postings don’t cover the whole year – and so I propose to fill in the gaps – and cover in some detail some of the important events I was involved in up to July – which I guess will help explain why my impression that 2010 was so eventful – and so long.

I guess my overriding concern at the start of the year – my last year as the chairman of the ARC was to extract as much out of the office – in terms of getting things done – as I could – while I could – before the ARC, and its chairman were consigned to history.  Even if I had felt pretty confident about winning the election (though nothing in politics can be taken for granted) – I was very much aware my time as chairman of the ARC was clearly running out.  One of the most corrosive things for the soul I believe is regret.  At the start of the years I was determined that I wasn’t going to look back at my time in office and have regrets for not doing this or doing that – while I still could.

 Surveying the year from the lofty heights of the last days of 2010 – I want to take one last look back at this very eventful – very long year.

 Those who know me – or who follow this blog – will be familiar with my keen interest in natural history and how I  tried where possible to weave personal activism in the area of conservation biology into my job as ARC chairman.

Offshore Island Research Group

As it happens the first noteworthy event I was involved in, early in January 2010,  was to join a party of naturalists, Ewen Cameron, Mark Bellingham and John McCallum on a boat trip to a number of rarely visited small islets and stacks in the inner Gulf – to the south and east of Waiheke. Some 25 years or so ago, ‘back in the day’,  these men were young scientists, members of what they called ‘the Offshore Island Research Group’.   I had long admired their activities , and their entrepid scientific adventures – exploring and surveying small remote islands mainly in the Hauraki Gulf and northern New Zealand.  Their work had been written up (but not always published) in papers typically authored ‘McCallum et al.).  So it was a honour to be asked to join McCallum et al.   In brilliant weather we set off from Rocky Bay in John McCallum’s work boat to visit and explore in turn Koi, Passage Rock, Frenchmans Cap, Gannett Rock, Tarahiki, Ponui and Pakihi.   It was a fantastic day out on the Hauraki Gulf and I guess the highlight was when we discovered a late fledging grey-faced petrel still in its burrow on remote Tarahiki.

 Hillary Trail Opens

A couple of days later I was back in my office at the ARC preparing a speech – delivered later that day at the wonderful ceremony held at Piha to formally open the 80 km Hillary Trail.   Actually it was Peter and Sarah Hillary who did the opening, while my friend and colleague Sandra Coney chair of ARC Parks and Heritage -whose idea the long trail was – officiated.  Also present was Lady June Hillary, a sister of Ed Hillary, Minister of Conservation Hon. Tim Groser, Waitakere Mayor Bob Harvey who came up with the idea of naming the ARC’s long trail after Ed Hillary and of course lots of other guests including Super mayoral contender Len Brown.  The Hillary Trail was a huge achievement for the ARC and will become internationally famous – a major drawcard for visiting adventurist travellers and locals alike.

 The next day I was at Newmarket (along with the other main contender for Super Mayor John Banks) as Transport Minister Steven Joyce formally opened the Newmarket rail station.

Back to the islands – near…

The day after that, (we are still in early January) I travelled down to Crusoe (or Papakohatu) Island which lies half way between Waiheke and Motuihe Island along with ARC scientist Matt Baber and my old friend Dr Weihong Ji of Massey University to release shore skinks into the islands virtually pristine environment.  Crusoe is one of my favourite places where over the last 14 years, with the help of ARC Biosecurity and natural Heritage people, I progressed my original 1996 MSc survey into a personal ecological restoration project for the 0.7 ha island – including the eradication of mice.  For more info on Crusoe and lizard releases – see elsewhere on this site:

http://www.mikelee.co.nz/2010/11/gecko-release-…gacy-programme/

…and far

Then three days later I was on a plane with my long-term friend nd colleague, field scientist par excellence, Sandra Anderson bound for Tahiti to join Dr James Russell – himself a rising star of conservation science.  Our ultimate destination was a lonely motu in the Tetiaroa atoll 60km north of Tahiti, French Polynesia – called Honuea where working in the sweltering heat and forcing our way through near impenetrable pandanus we assisted James in a 3 week scientific experiment/come rat eradication project. This ended rather dramatically when we were airlifted off the atoll with only the clothes we were wearing (and a few personal effects like passports, wallets, iPhone and toothbrush) by the French military in the face of an onrushing hurricane threatening to overwhelm the island. Fortunately a couple of weeks later thanks to the authorities and Air New Zealand we got all our luggage back.

Then back in Auckland – the very next day I attended to Island Invasives Conference at Auckland University’s Tamaki campus to hear James deliver an excellent PowerPoint summary of his Tetiaroa research.  For more on Tetiaroa – see

http://www.mikelee.co.nz/2010/02/french-polynesia-conservation-work/

Queens Wharf – and the Mayoral Forum

The next week it was back into the old battleground – the Auckland Mayoral Forum to present a proposal on behalf of the government for a cruise ship terminal on Queens Wharf in time for the Rugby World Cup. This time the mayors led by John Banks (who must have thought it would help his Super Mayor ambitions) had decided to dig in and oppose government plans to build a cruise ship terminal on Queens Wharf.  The Mayoral Forum turned out to be a fiasco “We don’t want a boat shed on Queens Wharf!”.  This was in my view a dismal lack of leadership from the mayors and I was left to fight a solo battle on behalf of the government – a situation not without some irony.  I took some pleasure in criticising the Mayors and Mr Banks in particular in the media conference immediately after.

Super City – the battle for Auckland

Then it was time to confront the government on its plans to weaken the so-called Super City – especially by restricting the responsibilities of elected politicians and handing as much power as possible over to the hand-picked CCOs.  

The Transport CCO in its originall form was virtually designed to be totally unaccountable to the Auckland ratepayers who were providing half its funding.  Supported by ARC CEO Peter Winder and senior manager Christine Perrins we delivered a fairly devastating critique to the parliamentary select committee – which got a lot of media converage. As did a follow-up ‘op-ed’ article I wrote.  http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10632065

The effort wasn’t wasted and obviously helped pressure the government to dial back some of the more odious provisions in the original Bill.  Clearly the government’s attitude to empowering Auckland was and is deeply ambivalent.

Shakespear Sanctuary fence launched

Then soon after that in memorable ceremony on Shakespear regional Park we hlaunch the predator-proof fence which would help make Shakespear Regional Park a pest-free ‘mainland island’ nature sanctuary.  I first advocated for this in a paper presented to the ARC regional parks committee back in 1995.  It is enormously satisfying to see projects like this – usually considered a bit radical when first proposed – after all these years on their fulfilment.

Hauraki Gulf Marine Park celebrations

Late in February we travelled down to Motutapu to join with the Conseervation Minister, Kate Wilkinson and Gulf conservationists led by the doyen of conservationists the wonderful Jim Holdaway, and local body people – along with local Iwi, to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the Hauraki Gulf Marine Park.

This was followed up by a trip to Motuihe Island a couple of weeks later to release a second consignment of little spotted kiwi.

To cap off the celebration Auckland Museum and the ARC arranged an all-day seminar at the museum where I was asked to deliver a keynote speech on conservation projects across the Gulf.

Fighting Pine Harbour sludge dumping

But conservation is not just about turning up at bird releases. 

Despite all the high sounding platitudes, our natural environment is still under constant attack from those who want to exploit it.  The fight to protect nature therefore must be unrelenting. Opposing inshore dumping by those who wanted to use the Hauraki Gulf as a dumping ground had been one of my motivations to go into politics in the first place.  It was in an anti-dumping campaign Greenpeace action in 1992 that I was arrested for the first and only time in my life. The practice of dumping over the last 15 years has been thankfully phased out by major players like Ports of Auckland and the major marina owners –  with the unfortunate exception of Pine Harbour Marina Ltd.

I was called on to assist the good people of the Pohutukawa Coast Community Association (PCCA) of Beachlands in their David and Goliath resource consent hearing battle with Pine Harbour Marina.  Pine Harbour Marina Ltd had sought permission to continue to dump dredgings in the Whitford embayment.  Locals had complained about this for years but officialdom (including sadly ARC coastal officers) had not listened.  PCCA had originally asked me to assist in November 2009, knowing of my long-term opposition to inshore marine dumping.  It was then I started writing what turned out to be a 14,000 word submission.  Fortunately the hearing was adjourned for 3 months which gave me time to finish it.  When I finally delivered it to the hearing panel in April – it took me over 2 hours.  However it must have done some good, for despite Pine Harbour having the best ‘experts’ and lawyers their money could buy – and the PCCA having very little by way of resources – the hearing panel chaired by Leigh McGregor declined the application.  Congratulations to Grant George, Kane Glass and the members of PCCA.

Auckland Seabird Seminar Day

While I was on Tetiaroa I received an invitation to sum up and chair the final session of a Seabird Seminar at Auckland University organised by scientist Matt Rayner.  It is always a relief to escape from the office and the madhouse of politics – even for just a few hours.  Because of  the usual lack of time my speech was only thrown together during the conference but my role was to sum up the essential points made by the expert presenters – leading world authorities on the subject:  Chris Gaskin, Helen Gummer, Colin Miskelly, Henrik Moller, Matt Rayner, Graeme Taylor and David Towns.  As their presentations were so impressive – and succinct - chairing the final discussion and summing up turned out to be a real pleasure.

Thanks to Matt Rayner for the invitation.

http://www.cbb.org.nz/seminars.asp

Railway Stations

2010 was a big year for railway station openings in Auckland  – I think I attended all of them – which were opened by ARTA at regular intervals right through the year  – Newmarket, Grafton, Avondale, Kingsland extension, Onehunga, and New Lynn.  I guess the highlight for me was the opening of Onehunga – first of all for the sheer size of the crowd (massive!) – and because it took 8 years of political battling to achieve it.  Patronage on the Onehunga line is now exceeding even the most optimistic expectations.

www.aucklandtrains.co.nz/grafton-opening:-Mike-Lee-Calls-for-CBD-Rail-Loop

 http://www.mikelee.co.nz/2010/09/after-8-year-b…in-grand-style/

Queens Wharf  again – the McCully plan, ‘the Cloud’, ‘the Tent’, ‘the Slug’…and Shed 10.

It was around this time that Queens Wharf came back on the front burner when Murray McCully came to see me with a proposal for a temporary glass and plastic building on the wharf.  The idea it  would serve as ‘Party Central’ (in place of the cruise ship terminal vetoed by the mayors) during the Rugby World Cup.  McCully’s idea was to site the structure his people had called ‘the Cloud’ on the site of the dilapidated Shed 10.  The story of the not-so-temporary structure was somehow leaked to the NZ Herald which reported rumours of workers working around the clock to build a massive canvas tent.  Naturally McCully’s ‘Cloud’ for a time became widely known as ‘The Tent’.    Things got worse – when artists’ impressions were released  to reveal it clearly was not a ‘tent’ – it began to be called rather unfairly – ‘the slug’.   (Fortunately it’s now back to ‘the Cloud’).  A couple of days before the special Council meeting I called to deal with the McCully proposal I was given a heritage assessment of  Queens Wharf and its sheds (that had apparently been completed months before) along with a letter from Sherry Reynolds of the Historic Places Trust imploring us to protect the buildings.

This obliged me to reconsider the buildings – Shed 10 in particular – in their wider heritage context.  The NZHPT concerns were shared by other councillors like Sandra Coney, Christine Rose, Brent Morrissey, Joel Cayford and Paul Walbran.

Accordingly the ARC decision to go along with the McCully ‘Cloud’ proposal was predicated on formal consultation with the NZHPT about the sheds.  In my book ‘consultation’ has a legal meaning.  It was a process I intended to take seriously. Soon after, along with Peter Winder I was invited to Wellington to meet Minister McCully with Historic Places Trust CEO Bruce Chapman and Sherry Reynolds.  On the plane down I studied the heritage reports carefully to prepare myself for the meeting.

However the meeting in the Minister’s beehive office turned out to be somewhat different than the exchange of ideas I expected.  Rather then an open discussion to find a way through the problem, the Minister launched forth into a monologue, subjecting the hapless NZHPT people to a long and rather stern lecture.  Seeing their discomfort I began to feel pretty uncomfortable myself.  After that I decided to consult some trusted heritage expert friends – as well as the NZHPT to try to find a way through.

The red gates open after decades – Queens Wharf become ‘Peoples’ Wharf’

Meanwhile returning to our original objectives on the afternoon of Anzac Day 25^th April Queens Wharf was formally opened to the public by Minister McCully for the NZ government, and myself on behalf of  the ARC.  It was a superb day and Aucklanders turned out in force – the Navy patrol corvette Rotoiti especially attracting thousands of visitors.  Queens Wharf in many respects had become a 3 hectare regional park, prime harbourside open space – right at the front door of the CBD.  I am sure it will turn out to be one of the ARC’s most important legacy projects.  A place where ordinary citizens can go to commune with the sea – and get up close to ships.

Bellbird translocation to the inner Gulf.

In May my focus went on overseeing plans to translocate bellbirds to Waiheke (Whakanewha Park and the Fenwick Reserve and Motuihe Island).  This was to be honest one of my hobby-horses and I saw it as a classic ‘do it while you can’ legacy project.  The original concept hammered out in 2008 with the support of Rob Fenwick and John Laurence of the Motuihe Trust was pretty audacious – 150 bellbirds transferred simultaneously to three release sites in one combined operation.   The project had been planned for 18 months.  ARC conservation scientist Tim Lovegrove who managed the whole opeation – one of the country’s leading ornithologists – made it even more complex (and more scientifically interesting) by proposing two source areas rather than one (Tawharanui and Tiritiri Matangi) thus also broadening the founder gene pool – and by agreeing to a last minute request from Landcare Research, Hamilton adding on another 50 birds to be released in the Hamilton gardens.  The simultaneous translocation of 200 birds to 4 widely dispersed sites would make the operation the largest and most logistically complex NZ bird transfer ever attempted.

Early in May teams of field volunteers set to work mist-netting birds on Tiritiri Matangi and at Tawharanui Regional Park – where I drive up with ARC scientist Matt Baber to thank them.  Then later the same day I was on the plane to Melbourne to deliver a paper on Auckland transport to the UrbanRail Conference.

A week after my return from Melbourne it was exciting to be present on Waiheke and a couple of days later on Motuihe island to help release consignments of bellbirds into their new environment.  There was huge public interest on Waiheke and a huge staff and volunteer effort was put in.  As I say the plan was bold and ambitious – elegant even – but not without risk.  The Landcare Hamilton Garden release did fail almost immediately as released birds rapidly dispersed – one finding its way back all the way to Tiri. On Waiheke some birds also rapidly dispersed. Remarkably one bird flew over to Motuihe where it was identified when it visited a feeder station – and then soon after flew back to Waiheke.  Extraordinary!

I spent some time out of the office in May and June doing radio telemetry monitoring (let the paper work wait for a day!).

Many birds stayed in the release areas at Whakanewha and Te Matuku peninsula for some months visiting the feeders until the early spring but after that sightings gradually fell away.  There is evidence to suggest bellbirds remain on Waiheke but in low numbers.  On Motuihe (the strategic reserve) a small number of birds including at least one bird from Waiheke have settled and now appear to be breeding.  This at least gives cause for hope for long term success.  These Motuihe birds – reinforced by a growing population on Motutapu (which have according to some reports been joined by some of our released banded birds) will eventually form a stable metapopulation in the inner Gulf.  Hopefully in the not-too-distant future as hoped, bellbirds will be regularly visiting the Auckland mainland as well as Waiheke.  The outcome of this experiment underscores the importance of removing rats from islands like Waiheke.

I was very pleased as a result of this project to get to know two young scientists who made an impressive contribution to the monitoring and therefore the scientific results of the project, David Bryden who carried out the monitoring for the ARC on Waiheke and a young French scientist Adrien Lambrechts who carried out a similar role for the Motuihe Trust. 

Wynyard Heritage Tramway

During my visit to Melbourne I presented my paper – as indicated below

http://www.mikelee.co.nz/2010/05/sins-of-the-fathers-the-decline-and-rise-of-rail-transit-in-auckland/

Among other things this focussed on the appalling blunder made by Auckland’s ‘city fathers’ in 1956 when they ended Auckland’s very popular tram services and ripped up 72km of tracks.  After the conference I was able to meet officials in the Victorian state government to discuss the possibility of their making available a couple of heritage trams for our proposed waterfront heritage tramway in Auckland.  Returning from Melbourne my enthusiasm rekindled at the possibility of returning trams to the CBD I was dismayed to discover that despite a nearly a year of study noone had come up with practical solution on how to get the tramway based in the Wynyard Quarter connected to Britomart.

Fanshawe Street was out – as it was an extremely busy arterial – and the Auckland City transport officials would clearly not likely to be impressed with the road being dug up to build tram lines.   The ‘iconic bridge’, despite much hype from Auckland City in 2008 had also been put on the back-burner.  A scheme to run a tram line from the Wynyard Quarter along narrow winding Viaduct Drive was likely to cause issues with the on-road parking, and conceivably neighbouring apartment residents could be disturbed as the trams squeaked around the tight curves.  It all looked a bit grim.  It then occurred to me – why not just make a start and leave the getting to Britomart problem for the future. One rainy night, late in May after work I drove down to the Wynyard Quarter. Turning into Halsey Street from Fanshawe Street, I slowly drove the length of Halsey before turning left into Jellicoe.  I drove along Jellicoe passed the Sanford fish market until I reached Beaumont and turning into Beaumont and headed back south.  When I reached Gaunt I turned left again and stopped once I reached Halsey.  The distance on my odometer measured exactly 1.5km.  Not very much – but it would do for a start.

The next day I proposed to staff that we run with this very basic configuration.  Another advantage to this approach was that it relatively cheap to build.  Peter Winder raised the idea with John Dalzell of Sea +City Projects Ltd, the Auckland Regional Holdings subsidiary charged with developing the Wynyard Quarter – now part of the Waterfront Development Agency.  Thankfully John liked it – (for some time he had been given thought to the tramway idea  which was originally promoted to the ARC in 2009 by Cam Pitches of CBT and tram enthusiasts from MOTAT) but was concerned with costs and the practicalities.  But my solution was do-able and affordable – and pretty soon after the tramway became Sea +City official policy.

However another major technical issue emerged when concerns about overhead electric wires and possible difficulties that this could cause with heavylift loads - i.e. new or partially built yachts, with masts and spars being carried by truck.  Sea + City’s immediate response was to investigate battery powered trams.  I was very doubtful whether that would work but at least it showed Sea + City’s genuine commitment to the tram idea.

Soon a more sensible solution emerged when Sea+City came up with the idea of running the tramway along Daldy Street (the future ‘linear park’), parallel with Beaumont Street. This had the benefit of avoiding the marine industry area.  Sea + City then employed Motat’s tramway expert Colin Zeff to head up the project and give or take the odd bureaucratic issue, it has never looked back.

Of course nothing good ever comes easy.  From 1956 on, Auckland’s history has been littered with periodic large-scale plans to restore light rail – which raise hopes for a time but invariably end in failure.   The last of these was in 2001.  The idea of a fairly puny ‘heritage tramway’ designed as a tourist attraction, while it deflected the attentions of the official public transport bureaucracy (which most certainly would have crushed it) but the ‘heritage tramway’ also drew scorn from certain self-styled cultural high priests – and even the usually positive Brian Rudman.   One the other hand, enthusiasts, naïve in the extreme, wanted our tramway to at once be connected through Ponsonby to the Motat line at Western Springs.   My response – better our tramway to be sniggered at by arty snobs than be crushed by Auckland City Council, MoT, NZTA, the private bus companies et al.

A final postscript – in August Peter Winder and I called on John Duthie at Auckland City to make a pitch that the ‘temporary walking and cycling’ bridge be made strong enough to carry trams.  John was rather taken aback but helpful.  A few days later he reported back that while the bridge deck would remain ‘temporary’ the piles and essential structure would be built strong enough to carry a tram track linking the Wynyard Quarter to Britomart – in the not too distant future.

With 150 tonnes of tram rails now on site, and two trams (to be painted in traditional Auckland tram colours) on their way from Victoria, our Wynyard heritage tramway has overcome all bureaucratic hurdles and is on track (excuse pun) for completion in mid 2011 and for an official opening by the Waterfront Development Agency next August.

http://www.mikelee.co.nz/2010/06/trams-to-make-comeback-on-aucklands-streets/</a>

http://www.mikelee.co.nz/2010/09/motats-‘i-am-t…-is-never-over/

Queens Wharf – finally sorted?

After taking soundings with a number of heritage advocates I respected and admired, in discussion with Sherry Reynolds of the NZHPT I proposed a pragmatic compromise for Queens Wharf.  The outer Shed 11 to be dismantled and re-erected in another appropriate maritime environment.  Shed 10 to be kept, repaired in new materials, and with NZHPT active involvement suitably modified to become Auckland’s new international Cruise Ship terminal.   This was in late May – despite my best attempts at persuasion it was to be almost 2 months in Mid July before the government would finally agree to this sensible solution.   This was rather frustrating because we were obliged to keep our solution confidential for weeks until the government agreed to it.  In the end – early in July I called a public meeting of the ARC to reveal that the ARC had indeed reached a settlement with the NZHPT – with which the government would not agree.  This was followed by a very large media conference.  Clearly this was a major political stand-off between the ARC and the government. A couple of days later I travelled (at my own expense) to China where I hoped to meet the Prime Minister at the Shanghai Expo in an attempt to convince him of the sincerity of our purpose and the sense of our solution.   The ARC councillors supported me on this – and while I was out of the country even the most conservative members held firm against media criticism and pressure from Minister McCully.  I did manage to meet the PM and make my case. In the end the government modified its hardline position and accepted the compromise.  The Cloud will be built at the end of Queens Wharf where Shed 11 stood and Shed 10 will be repaired and restored – to once again become a working part of our maritime heritage – as a cruise ship terminal – hopefully permanently.  The recent ‘launching’ ceremony of Carnival Lines Pacific Pearl accompanied by a huge public party on Queens Wharf demonstrated what a fantastic asset Queens Wharf is to Auckland.

http://www.mikelee.co.nz/2010/09/cruise-ship-rennaisance-could-mean-return-to-aucklands-golden-age-of-passenger-shipping/

Here I will stop – mid-July brings really brings my review to an end – the rest of the year, elections, the other ARC legacy projects, the election of Len Brown as Super Mayor, the emotional goodbye to the ARC and the hopeful beginnings of the new Auckland Council, the row over the CBD Link and the Holiday Highway, have all been pretty-well chronicled on this site.  Just getting this far (to July 2010) in this post has taken over 3,500 words.  

As for me at the end of this tumultuous year, despite all the high political drama in Auckland, I find my mind tends to go back to the three remarkable weeks in January and February when we stayed and worked on Tetiaroa.  I still visualise the scene at dusk looking across the lagoon at the lonely motu of Honuea, Horoatera, Aie, Rimatutu and Reiono, the frigate birds patrolling above and the harsh mournful cries of the noddie terns, the coconut palms bending in the breeze and the eternal boom of surf on the reef.

As I said – 2010 was a very long year.  So farewell 2010.

Best wishes for the New Year 2011

 Back in August I was criticised by some of my friends in the Green Party for refusing to show up at a rally organised by Keith Locke to demonstrate support for the CBD Rail Link.

My reason was simply that as the rail link was still under study by a team of experts commissioned by KiwiRail and ARTA/ARC, it wouldn’t be good form to be up on a soapbox declaiming via megaphone that it should go ahead.  It will be recalled that when I was chairman of the ARC in 2009 I accepted the Minister of Transport Steven Joyce argument that a business case would need to be made to justify the project going ahead.

Now the long-awaited study has finally been released and its recommendations are better than any rail supporter could have hoped for.  The study reveals that using standard Treasury criteria (8% discount rate etc), the CBD rail link has a benefit cost ratio (BCR) of 3.5 (including wider economic benefits), or using more conservative criteria, the NZTA Economic Evaluation Manual, it has a BCR of 1.1.  Essentially the business case provides compelling evidence that not only is the rail link economically viable but that it is absolutely essential for the ongoing development of Auckland.

So given my own approach (respecting the process and waiting until the business case was out) I have to confess being more than surprised at the response of the Minister of Transport.  Rather than merely receiving the business case and announcing that it would be given serious study, Steven Joyce immediately set about trying to discredit it.

History repeats? This Herald cartoon published 2 Nov 1954 lampoons the scuttling by the National government of a previous plan to build an underground rail link through Auckland. The bound and gagged figure depicts Auckland Mayor J.H. Luxford. (from 'Decently and in Order' by Dr Graham Bush).

A lot of public transport advocates have found Steven Joyce something of an enigma. While many have always suspected he was just another ‘roads first’ National Party politician, others have not been so sure – seeing him as a modern, sophisticated technocrat – open minded to the possibilities of rail.   I confess I have been in the latter school of thought.   In my assessment the Minister is a very smart fellow, more intelligent than most run-of-the-mill politicians. It’s his natural ability that has made him such a senior Minister and such an important member of the government – ‘the Minister for Everything’. Moreover Steven Joyce has always been keen to give the impression that he is first of all interested in objectivity and rigour – in other words ‘what works’ when making decisions around transport.  “Hard-nosed decisions” is one of Joyce’s favourite expressions. 

Reinforcing that impression was a series of decisions Joyce made in 2009, around electrification. First of all in March 2009 he cancelled the regional fuel tax initiative, thereby forcing the abandonment of the EMU tender process, then 9 months later after studying the evidence for himself he approved (again) the electrification of Auckland rail and the acquisition of a new fleet of electric rolling stock.  Moreover Steven Joyce has always made a lot of effort to get to Auckland rail station opening ceremonies – of which there has been many over the last couple of years and to speak positively about a balanced approach to transport (in other words not roads versus rail but roads and rail).

In regard to the CBD Link the Minister had previously been careful not to dismiss it out of hand and has even made some mildly supportive comments.  Given that apparently reasonable approach from the Minister I have tried to reciprocate by refraining from partisan comments (or turning up at rallies) until the business case was completed.

But now the case has been completed – and how revealing it has proven to be. Revealing not just in the sense of the benefits of the CBD rail link but also indirectly revealing of the government’s agenda for Auckland.  The CBD Rail Link Business Case, and Minister Joyce’s reaction to it, has also finally revealed in pretty stark relief exactly where Steven Joyce is coming from.

This has not been an especially good period for the Minister of Transport.  Clearly anyone with knowledge of the Auckland Super City reorganisation would know just how intimately involved the Minister of Transport was in all aspects of this.  Not just on the establishment of the Mega CCO, Auckland Transport, but it became very obvious that the Minister of Transport had his fingers all over the process – including areas which would have seemed to be quite outside his portfolio. 

Furthermore it was quite obvious that the government was expecting that their man John Banks and his government-friendly ‘affordable progress’ policies was going to win.  As it turned out Banks crashed and burned and it was Len Brown with a visionary manifesto very much based around rail projects who won a resounding mandate from Aucklanders.

With Plan A now around the government’s ankles, the government has gone to ‘Plan B’.  ‘Plan B’ is to delay any new rail projects for as long as possible by refusing to fund them. Plan B was in evidence during the Auckland Council swearing-in ceremony when the new Mayor, councillors and a crowded Town Hall audience of leading citizens was subjected to an embarrassingly obvious lecture from the Prime Minister about how important it was for the new Auckland Council to spend 18 months completing a ‘spatial plan’ before embarking on any major infrastructural projects like CBD Rail and rail to the airport.  Let me correct that – I should say ‘rail infrastructural projects’ – obviously the government would be unlikely to be calling for a freeze on road projects. 

‘Plan B’ was also in evidence in Minister Joyce’s letter to the newly elected Mayor of Auckland Len Brown revealed in the NZ Herald a couple of week’s ago.  Joyce had wasted no time in getting see the newly elected Mayor – and met with him on 14 October.  That was more than two weeks before he was sworn into office. The point of the meeting was to try to warn the Mayor off his visionary rail programme for Auckland.

The crux of Joyce’s message to the Mayor in a follow up letter of 28 October was that in terms of Auckland rail services, the Minister had discovered “an annual operating funding shortfall of $30m per year”.  (Never mind that the funding shortfall is almost entirely the result of policy decisions directly or indirectly made by the Minister)

In case the Mayor didn’t get the message the letter concludes with:

“Finally, it is my understanding that Auckland Transport and KiwiRail will formally present the initial Auckland CBD rail tunnel business case to us before the end of the year.  However it is imperative that we resolve the current metro rail funding shortfalls before we consider broader capital programmes to expand the network.”

Now with the release of the CBD Rail Link Business Case, ‘Plan B’ has racheted up a gear with the Minister trying to pour scorn on the business case. 

It would seem that why the Minister has become so emotional about the CBD rail link (which clearly he doesn’t especially care for one way or the other), is that the rail link has become inextricably entangled with something the Minister really does care for – the Puhoi to Wellsford road project – aka ‘the Holiday Highway’.

Clearly the CBD rail link, which at around $2 billion is about the same cost as the Holiday Highway, has become in Joyce’s mind the unwelcome – even dreaded Doppelgänger of his much favoured Puhoi to Wellsford roading project.

Last week a devastating critique of the Holiday Highway appeared in the Sunday Star-Times by business journalist Rod Oram. 

http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/business/4366408/Going-down-the-wrong-road

Oram’s article is so important I will quote from it at some length.

“The motorway will significantly distort development patterns, thereby blighting the region. It will help push urban development out to 85km north of Auckland’s CBD over coming decades.

This will exacerbate Auckland’s weakness as a sprawling city, with dire economic consequences. Worldwide evidence shows lower density means higher infrastructure costs, favouring private over public transport and a weaker network effect. People living and working closely together generate greater wealth than those spread out.

In fact, the government knew last year the motorway was uneconomic, according to the cost/benefit analysis done for it. Likewise, the Waikato Expressway and Wellington to Levin motorway were uneconomic under conventional analysis.

That was very embarrassing for the government. After all, the three projects account for almost half of its $11b, 10-year Roads of National Significance programme. And the analysis showed speeding up the projects, which the government promises, would reduce the benefits.

These were political problems it created for itself. It announced the seven roads in March 2009, nine months before it received the economic analysis. It didn’t like the analysis, so spent another seven months getting the answers it wanted, according to documents coming to light.

Transport Minister Steven Joyce is proud of the government’s work ethic. “No work had been done on this project prior to it being confirmed as a road of national significance last year so this is great progress,” he said last week when announcing the route for the first stage from Puhoi.

The government got its unwelcome news about its uneconomic road projects in the work it commissioned from SAHA, an Australian-based consultancy. SAHA’s December 2009 report, billed as its final one, showed the conventional cost/benefit ratio of the Puhoi to Wellsford project was 0.4, meaning for every $1 invested the return was 40c; the Waikato Expressway’s was 0.5 and the Wellington Northern Corridor 0.9”

 That’s right, Oram revealed that according to SAHA the CBR for the Wellsford to Puhoi is only 0.4!!!

Not surprisingly the Minister was infuriated and demanded the right of reply. http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/business/4395254/Getting-around-in-the-real-world

Those like me waiting with some anticipation for how the Minister would explain away the derisory 0.4 BCR for the Puhoi to Wellsford were to be disappointed. Joyce didn’t even try to respond to that most devastating revelation.  Instead of employing sophisticated counter-arguments, what Joyce gave readers was a stream of consciousness, obviously written by the Minister himself, revealing some fairly banal conservative views – including a snide comment about the ARC and the Metropolitan Urban Limits policy. (He also misrepresented the ARC policy on road access to Puhoi).  In fact Mr Joyce revealed his views on transport and urban development to be standard ‘roads first’ and pro urban-sprawl – in other words fairly basic small-town red neck stuff. 

In many ways this is history repeating itself – there have been two previous attempts to expand Auckland’s rail network with an inner city undergound link   Such a scheme was first proposed by Minister of Railways (later Prime Minister) Gordon Coates as early as 1923.  In the late 1940s the Ministry of Works formulated a scheme which was accepted by all parties for nearly 10 years before being killed off by the National Government of the time – with the active compliance of the then Auckland City Council.  Again in the late 1960s the ARA and the NZ Railways worked up another plan, again with an underground loop known as ‘Robbies Rapid Rail’. This in turn was killed off in 1975 by the newly elected National government of Robert Muldoon.

Not only is there an echo of events but also of personalities – with Steven Joyce the present-day ‘Minister for Everything’ playing the role of the 1950s era National ‘Minister of Everything’ Stan Goosman.

Clearly this debate has got a fair way to run – but it would seem clear to me that sooner or later if the National government wants to be re-elected next year it will have to concede that unlike the Puhoi to Wellsford Highway with its BCR of 0.4 – the CBD Rail Link does stack up.  The National Government would dearly love to kill it off – but if they are not careful what comes roaring out of Auckland’s underground rail link could end up running down the National government.

For further excellent commentary and analyses please go to these sites to read articles by Josh Arbury, Cam Pitches and Martin Gummer

http://transportblog.co.nz/2010/12/07/cbd-tunnel-vs-puhoi-wellsford-an-in-depth-analysis/

http://www.bettertransport.org.nz/2010/11/rod-oram-exposes-economic-fallacy-of-puford-toll-road/

http://transportblog.co.nz/2010/12/06/martin-gummers-opinion-piece/

Mike Lee’s speech to the Auckland Council opposing the St Luke’s expansion decision.

We have heard a lot about ‘fairness’ this morning – I want to know what’s fair about the Auckland Council – the ‘Super City’ – lining up with Westfield, the world’s biggest shopping mall owner – with a turnover of $22 billion a year against the people of local conmunity.  That’s not fair where I come from.

This business is not fair – by any definition – it is blatantly unfair.  Not only unfair – it is not rational – especially in terms of the sustainable development of Auckland.

There are two elements to this unsavoury affair – the process and the substantive matter itself.

First of all let me talk about the process.  What is clear about this is that the people of St Lukes – Mt Albert are the victim of a cynical political manoeuvre by the former Auckland City Council.  Knowing the depth of public feeling against this development – in what was a marginal electorate – the politicians held this decision over until after the election – and even then the matter was so odious they passed on to the new Council.

Well I don’t intend to rubber stamp this decision – I don’t want to be an accessory after the fact.

Shame on the politicians of Auckland City Council and shame on the officers for going along with this cynical manoeuvre.  When it suited them – they delayed the decision – and now as it suits them they can’t get the matter onto the agenda quick enough.  That’s the process – so let no-one tell us or the local community that this process is fair.

A huge amount of time and effort has gone into restructuring local government in Auckland – many people have lost their jobs, there has been major sacrifices made.  I for one believed that in the end those sacrifices, that price was worth paying for the vision of a united Auckland.  But along with structure change there is the expectation of culture change – but instead of culture change we have Auckland City Council business as usual.

 As regards to the substantive issue itself, there are serious concerns here.  If the Commissioners recommendations are accepted – this will be New Zealand’s biggest shopping mall.  A shopping mall which most planners would agree is in entirely located in the wrong place.  St Lukes is where it is because of  short-sighted decisions in the past – so why would we want to go and compound those mistakes. 

The argument has been made that this will be “good for business.”

First of all I would I contest the notion that the multi-national conglomerate Westfield represents the interests of the business folk of Auckland.  In fact allowing New Zealand’s biggest mall to be built in that area – will not only suck the commercial life out of the neighbouring genuine town centres – Like Mt Albert and Sandringham – it will also have a negative impact on other town centres – including Queen Street, Ponsonby Road and even Newmarket.  Overall this will be bad for business and bad for Auckland.

One of the tasks this council will have to accomplish is the drawing up of a ‘spatial plan’ – the government has placed much importance on this.  In fact the Prime Minister even gave us something of a lecture on the importance of completing this spatial plan before the government could consider funding the CBD rail link.  So why is it that while we have been told to hold off on beneficial projects like the CBD rail link – we are being rushed into making a decision on this project which will have huge impacts on the urban form and traffic flows on the central isthmus – and beyond.

The officer advice on this matter has not been balanced, – very little emphasis has on the major traffic problems this development will cause.  Doubling the size of the mall also includes doubling the size of the number of car parks.

Already there are major congestion problems in this area.  St Lukes Road has a 7 day average of 15,000 traffic movements – this is about the same number of traffic movements on the Puhoi to Wellsford section of SH1.  It is concerns with congestion on this section of SH1 which has prompted the government to budget $2 billion dollars for a brand new highway.   If traffic generated from the St Lukes Mall is to double imagine the impacts on traffic congestion this will bring.

There are other major fundamental flaws in this scheme.  The question of wastewater and storm water has not be adequately dealt with at all – and is in fact technically this development will be in breach of the Regional Policy Statement in this regard.

Its no solution to say – this is going off to the Environment Court regardless of what decision the Auckland Council makes.  And while I commend the mayor in offering to mediate between the parties, the fact is – if we rubber-stamp this decision we will be embarking on an adversarial court process – with the Auckland Council committed alongside Westfield – against the local community.  Wouldn’t it make sense to hold off making a decision on this – surely that would give more credibility to the mayor’s offer to mediate.

The people of St Lukes – Mt Albert have been treated shamefully.  There is a total disparity of power when it comes to these court processes.  The local community will not only have to pay for their own lawyers and expert witnesses – but through their rates they will be paying for the Auckland Council’s lawyers and expert witnesses who will be lined up with Westfield against them.  The local community had only one thing which could have equalised matters – that was the power of their vote.  But because of the cynical manoeuvre of postponing the decision until after they had voted – even that right was deliberately and cynically taken out of the equation.

Regarding the process itself and the commissioners’ recommendations – the officers’ advice appears to be the councillors have no choice but to accept the recommendations.  In other words our choice is to vote “Yes” or “Yes”.  But I reject that. We have the right to say no – we have the right of refusal.

Contrary to the officers’ advice assuring us that the process was sound and fair – it was not.

The Council has received complaints from the public about overt bias displayed by  individual commissioners in dealing with submitters.   Of course I wasn’t there so I can’t verify this – but complaints have been made and they need to be taken seriously.

Then there is the general concern about this process that the counsel for Westfield Mr Derek Nolan – at around the same time as leading this case in front of the commissioners was also interviewing candidates for positions in the Auckland Council.  It’s no fault of the officers that they were interviewed by Mr Nolan – but I hope that none of the officers who were unfortunate enough to be interviewed by Mr Nolan are involved in offering advice on this case.

Finally I think the strongest reason for having this case reheard is a technical one – which also involves the principle of natural justice.

At the same time as this process was running, Westfield’s lawyers were also involved in an appeal on another set of plan changes for the Regional Policy Statement.

As part of the ‘wash-up’ in settling those appeals – the lawyers for Westfield managed to get St Lukes to be designated a ‘Town Centre’.

However this happened after public submissions closed – and this matter was never made known to the general public at the time.  I was not aware of it myself.  But the commissioners were certainly aware of it and obviously appreciated its significance, more than anyone else (apart from Westfield).  The commissioners’ decision to approve the St Lukes development was very much based on that technical change to the ARPS – that St Lukes Mall was henceforth to be considered a ‘Town Centre’.

Regardless what one may feel about this fake Town Centre, if you read the commissioners’ decision, significant emphasis was placed on St Luke Mall’s newfound status as a Town Centre.  Something that the submitters were unaware of when they wrote their submissions.  No doubt if they had known, then their submissions would have been shaped quite differently to address this aspect of the case.  But as they didn’t know about this evidence they were unable to address it.  The submitters were unable to see all the evidence – critical evidence that the commissioners made their decision on.   The right to see all the evidence is a fundamental tenet of law.  That all evidence was not available to the public when they submitted is a fundamental flaw in this process and a major breach of natural justice.

This provides the Auckland Council with a compelling reason why the whole case should be reheard.

The people of Auckland have expectations that things would be different with the advent of the Super City.  They have those expectations because they have been led to believe that things would be different.  But what they are getting is business as usual.

Allowing to Westfield to go ahead with this would not only be unfair to the local community but would be a profound strategic error in terms of the urban shape and form of Auckland for decades to come..  As Chateaubriand once said of something Napoleon had done “It was worse than a crime – it was a mistake.”

Rau rangatira ma – kua tae mai nei I te te kaupapa o te ra – te kotahitanga o Tamaki makau rau.  Tena koutou katoa.

 Mr Mayor, Members of the Governing body, ladies and gentlemen, greetings and to you all and once again congratulations.

 Congratulations also to the CEO Mr Mckay and to the organisers of the magnificent inauguration ceremony in the town hall last evening. Thanks also to the Prime Minister, government ministers, mana whenua, local board members our fellow elected members of the Auckland Council, former local government members, present and former council staff, and the hundreds of interested and caring Auckland citizens who attended and who contributed to that historic event.

Most of all congratulations to you Mr Mayor for the magnificent speech.  perfectly pitched and inspirational.  The capstone of a wonderful evening.

The Auckland Council has been formally launched – and it could not have begun in more auspicious circumstances.  It was an historic day for Auckland, a great night for Aucklanders and a new beginning for us all.

The people of Auckland, now united, look to the future with very high hopes.

 But before we resolutely march off into that future – it is appropriate to look back, for one last time.   To look back and to reflect on the fact that in creating such a powerful, united organisation – the Auckland Council – 8 other organisations, the 4 city councils, the 3 district councils and the Auckland regional council, had to die.

That did not happen easily, nor did it happen without a human cost.  A cost to many of the people who worked for those councils – as permanent staff or as elected office holders. 

I want to pay my respects to those councils and the men and women who dedicated their lives and careers to them.  All of the Councils in their own different ways left a legacy of good for Auckland and it is fitting and indeed remarkable that every one of the 8 former councils has a former elected member of that council here today as a member of the new governing body of the united Auckland Council.

I am well aware that at various stages over the last 18 months or so all of the councils, their professional staff, their councillors and their mayors have been through what only can be described as a form of grieving.

I think that the ARC’s grieving came quite late in the piece.  The finality of it all especially hit home for us only during our final farewell ceremonies which were held over the last couple of weeks.  And I must say I very much shared this sense of sadness.  Goodbye is the saddest word.

 There was a certain amount of irony in this because it was the ARC itself –  with me as its leader – which quite forcefully articulated and argued for the unitary structure that we now have today -and it was my council which voted for its own abolition.  It was essentially the model proposed by the ARC which formed the basis of the Royal Commission’s findings.   Those findings were taken up by the government and refined to something even closer to the original ARC proposal. 

That proposal of course was for the unification of greater Auckland into one organisation (which we called the ‘Greater Auckland Council’).  An organisation containing two tiers – one tier (now called the Governing Body) to deal with the larger, more regional issues and a second tier, the Local Boards (which we called the ‘community councils’) the job of which was to restore the ‘local’ to Auckland local government. 

It’s a model we called ‘the One and the Many’.  And the ‘One and the Many’ is what we now have.

So when some of the ARC senior managers came, one by one, to say goodbye to me late last week and three of them broke down and cried – this all weighed very much on my mind.

 As I walked the corridors of Regional House and looked up at the photos of the early members of the ARA and the various chairman like Dove-Meyer Robinson, Hugh Lambie, Tom Pearce and Lee Murdoch I wondered if they would agree with what we had done – in so energetically supporting the abolition of their 47 year old organisation.  After All Dove-Meyer Robinson battled for years to get the government to agree to the formation of the Auckland Regional Authority.  What would Robbie have thought of all this?

Well, after some soul-searching, my conclusion was that one has to remember that people like Robbie and the people around him were visionaries – perhaps that word has become a little overused in recent times – but they weren’t institutionalist, hide-bound sort of people – they were radicals. 

They believed in Auckland and they believed in regionalism.  They believed in a Greater Auckland.

Greater Auckland not only in the geographical sense – but also in the aspirational sense.

I am comforted to think that Robbie and all the great regional leaders of those times would have been right behind the Super City – and had they heard Mayor Len Brown’s inspirational speech last night they would have applauded the loudest.

All the same I suggest we always keep in our hearts – and in our memories the sorrow and the tears of our former colleagues.  Let us remember that sacrifice, and redouble our efforts to make the Auckland Council and its future achievements worth that sacrifice.

I want to thank the Mayor for appointing me as chair of the transport committee and I want to state that I firmly support his vision as he so memorably unveiled it last night.

 Things like:

• an international standard rapid rail system – including the CBD Loop and rail to the airport.
• a new cruise ship terminal on a redeveloped waterfront
• holding on to our wealth-producing, publicly-owned assets,
•  a fair go for our long-suffering ratepayers, 
• and commitment towards building unity and harmony for all Auckland as we go forward.

I support also Mayor Brown’s obvious willingness, as the leader of over one third of the country’s population,  first to work loyally and constructively with the government of the day – but where necessary to speak out and stand up to the government on behalf of the people of Auckland.

And I pledge to him and to you all – that I will spare not effort to help his vision become a reality.

I am very proud to be the member for Waitemata and Gulf where I have lived/and or worked since 1970. And I pledge to work supportively with the 3 empowered Local Boards to further the interests of the people and environment of Waitemata and Gulf.

 Last night I had the feeling of a great unity, of a coming together and sense of a tremendous unleashed energy.

 Auckland – the sleeping giant is awakening.  Auckland, one feels, is at the threshold of great achievements and is at last ready to achieve its great potential.

 Mr Mayor, fellow members, Ladies and gentlemen, there is a tremendous amount to be proud of about Auckland. Our superb harbours and waterfront, the volcanic cones, the magnificent Hauraki Gulf and its islands, our beautiful beaches, our outstanding regional parks and civic amenities.

It is my fervent hope – and the hope of thousands of Aucklanders that we also can achieve world class infrastructure – especially a world class rapid transit system.

Our collective vision and goal should be for an Auckland that in terms of its built environment, its civic infrastructure, its social and cultural fabric – aspires to the sublime level of Auckland outstanding natural landscape.  Tena tatou katoa.

Multiple translocation of common geckoes from Noises Islands to Crusoe and Motuora Islands. October 2010

Last Thursday I finally got to achieve an ambition I have had since 1996.  In its last ‘legacy project’ the ARC released 30 common geckoes Hoplodactylus maculatus onto Crusoe or Papakohatu Island in the inner Hauraki Gulf.

Crusoe (0.7ha) lies approximately half way between Motuihe and Waiheke Islands.  Despite its presence in one of Auckland’s most popular fishing grounds (the Motuihe channel) the island remains in many respects ‘invisible’.

While most conservation attention focuses on the more larger islands like Little Barrier, (Hauturu), Rangitoto, Motutapu, Tiritiri Matangi and Motuihe, it is not generally appreciated that the much more numerous islets (less than 1 hectare in size) of which there are 350 in the Hauraki Gulf alone have significant existing and potential conservation values – especially for seabirds and reptiles.

The release of common geckoes (as well as shore skinks) on Crusoe Island has been a personal project of mine since I first carried out a biological survey of the island as part of my MSc degree in 1996.  When I first visited the island in late January 1996, paddling by kayak from Waiheke, I discovered the island had been overrun with mice and its native vegetation infested with Rhamnus alaternus – an especially aggressive pest weed plant.  After a false start in 1996 in 2001 I finally managed to eradicate the last mouse from Crusoe. 

I always puzzled given the distance of Crusoe from the nearest neighbouring islands how mice ever got there in the first place and by chance recently I came across an account of how a Sanford fishing boat the Olive ran aground on Crusoe Island in October 1949 and as part of the salvage operation everything on the boat had to be unloaded onto the island.  This would certainly explain how mice got there.  Over recent years Rhamnus and other weeds have been progressively removed from Crusoe Island by ARC Biosecurity staff and myself – with Whakanewha parks ranger Andy Spence and Dan Beauchamp actively involved.  The island is now well covered in native coastal forest is in extremely good condition.

About-to-be-released Gecko and Mike on Crusoe Island (photograph - Diana Worthy Gulf News)

The geckoes were collected from Otata Island in the nearby Noises Group by Melinda Rixon for the ARC.  Melinda is an expert on native lizards (herpetologist) and runs an environmental management company Te Ngahere.  This release was combined with the transfer of 40 other common geckoes from Otata to Motuora Island.  Native geckoes are quite unique as they give birth to live young.  Common geckoes normally give birth to twins around about March.

Earlier this year, in January and in March we also released a total of 74 native shore skinks Oligosoma smithii on Crusoe.  The first release in early January comprised of 33 shore skinks which were were captive-bred at Massey University, Albany Campus in a programme run by Dr Weihong Ji.

The second release in March comprised of 41animals, which were all were collected from Tawharanui Regional Park.

The whole project was managed by ARC Natural heritage scientist Matt Baber (also a lizard specialist).

The lizard releases of 2010 are considered to have an excellent chance of success.

We are very appreciative of the support given by the Neureuter family who own the Noises Islands and of course Melinda who expertly collected the 70 geckoes involved in the double translocation.

Mike Lee, Matt Baber and Melinda Rixon - releasing geckoes on Crusoe Island

The completion of this project which was approved by the ARC in 2008 brought to a close a long list of ARC legacy projects this year – ranging from opening Newmarket Station, opening the Hillary Trail, opening Queens Wharf, reopening the Onehunga Branch Line and Onehunga Station (proving to be extremely popular), building a heritage tramway on the Wynyard waterfront, buying one more large coastal regional park, Te Muri, publishing a history of regional parks (‘Dreamers of the Day’) and releasing 100 bellbirds on Waiheke Island and 50 on Motuihe Islands – that we achieved in this very eventful year.

To know that Crusoe – small as it is – has been restored to an almost pristine condition and stocked with native lizards is extremely satisfying.

Our application to release Pacific Geckoes from Little Barrier Island on Crusoe was put on hold by Department of Conservation but could happen in the future.  Special thanks to Mick Courtnell from the Auckland Harbourmaster office for transporting us and the lizards to Crusoe -and for bringing us back. 

For more details on Crusoe Island see: Lee (1999) Biota of Seven Islets off Waiheke Island, inner Hauraki Gulf. Tane 37: 99-136.

ARC Councillors of 2007-2010. A happy team on a sad day. From left to right (back row)